Hold Congress Accountable

About FreedomConnector

Find activists, groups, and events right in your own neighborhood. Join FreedomConnector to get involved and learn more about key issues threatening our economic freedom. Whether you’re looking for like-minded people, trying to boost your existing group’s impact, or simply trying to stay up on current events, FreedomConnector is the place to start. See what’s happening in your state today!

Search FreedomWorks

Resources

Blog

Senate Democrats Seek Measures That Would Silence Half of the Electorate

Also known as the "nuclear option," Senate Democrats are gunning for parliamentary rule changes that would silence the Senate minority and along with them, their constituents.

Under current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to end debate and 67 votes are required to change the rules of the Senate. The nuclear option, pushed by Majority Leader Reid and Senators Udall and Merkley, would break the 67 vote rule in order to change the rules, meaning only a simple majority of 51 votes would be necessary for Democrats to change Senate rules, and in particular, the fillibuster rules. Given the current Senate make-up, this move is obviously politically advantageous to Democrats.

Under the current rules, the Senate's minority party has limited opportunities to influence legislation. It can do so in three main ways: by offering amendments in committee, by offering amendments on the Senate floor, and by negotiating with the majority party before the so-called cloture vote to end debate.

Sen. Reid has already gutted two of these three opportunities, which is a major reason for today's stalemate.

He has made unprecedented use of Senate Rule 14, for example, which allows the majority leader to bypass committees and write bills behind closed doors. Sen. Reid has used this rule to skip committees nearly 70 times, bringing bills straight to the floor—with zero input from members of the minority.

Also expressing concern, Senator Boozman explained the nuclear option as a, "power grab that would allow Majority Leader Reid to stop debate or compromise surrounding controversial legislation," or any legislation for that matter.

Interestingly enough, the Senator Reid of 2012 contradicts the Senator Reid circa 2005. "Ultimately, this is about removing the last check in Washington against complete, abusive power. Americans understand this is a partisan, political grab," Senator Reid said in 2005 when the Republican majority proposed a rule change that would eliminate the fillibustering of judicial nominees. Following debate, the rule change never took place.

Last week, Senator Johnson indicated the nuclear option would definitely weaken and possibly eliminate the minority parties ability to debate. "We need more transparency and bipartisanship not less," he said. Democrats do not have a legislative mandate. While the Democrats have a healthy majority in the Senate, the House is run by Republicans. It's time for Democrats to practice what they're forever preaching -- bipartisanship and compromise. But rather than reaching across the aisle to work with their Republican counterparts, Democrats seek to change the rules to suit their agenda, thereby eliminating dissenting opinion and debate of any kind.

It's time to get involved. "I caution the majority leader that I will not simply stand by and witness his destruction of the rights of senators, nor his power grab through clear breaking of Senate rules and precedents. I will fight back," Senator Paul said.

There's a wealth of information on the nuclear option here. And you can find your Senator's phone number here. Call the Senate Democrats and tell them you oppose their blatant attempt to silence the minority and call Senate Republicans to let them know you stand with them in the fight against the tyranny of the majority. We cannot sit idle while the left attempts to eradicate our voices from the debate.

We can see how much respect for America the Dems have...we as citizens must not allow the pillars of our government, checks and balances to be tossed aside like trash by these children in adult bodies.

Typical Socialist, Marxist, Communist b******s living in our country today. Why can't we force them out? What good is a Constitution if it can't be enforced. I thought it was the law of the land for America. There is an enemy within who should be dealt with the same way we would deal with a declaration of war. Rid our country of these people before it's too late. Harry Reid and the like, and then radical Islamist. They need to go. That includes Obama. He is animal excrement in the front yard of America.

FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe comment on Rep. Labrador's leadership run, "Rep. Labrador's impressive performance is indicative of a growing liberty caucus that is ready to make a policy agenda of individual liberty and fiscal responsibility a priority in the House. We are looking forward to an even bigger group of liberty leadership candidates after the elections in November."

FreedomWorks is mobilizing its membership to urge Rep. Raúl Labrador (ID-1) to run for House Majority Leader, following Eric Cantor’s resignation after his primary upset. Activists are calling on Rep. Labrador to run, as well as contacting their representatives in the House to support him. The leadership election will be on June 19, with Rep. Kevin McCarthy (CA-22) currently the only one in the race.

Democracy and Power 105: The Politician seeks power
To some people, government appears as a vast reservoir of power which inspires them to dream of what use might be made of it. They have favorite projects of various dimensions which they sincerely believe are for the benefit of mankind. They are thus disposed to recognize government—an instrument of passion, the art of politics to inflame and direct desire.
- Michael Oakeshott – English political philosopher 1901-1990

Back in November, when Harry Reid’s employed the nuclear option to allow judicial nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote, commentators on both sides of the political spectrum had plenty to say about the move. On the right, Reid was criticized for single-handedly uprooting years of Senate tradition and for robbing the minority party of their right to debate. On the left, Reid’s actions were praised as greasing the wheels of government to actually get things accomplished in the face of intractable Republican opposition. Supporters of Reid appealed to a sense of Democracy, arguing that majority should rule and that the sixty-vote threshold is an arcane relic of a different time.